Bring me… the PHONE!

Live near Tunbridge Wells? Feel like a meal out? Why not try Kirthon Restaurant60 The Pantiles, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, 01892526633.

Just don’t take anyone who is blind of course because they’ll threaten to call the cops on you if they have a guide dog. In a clear violation of the Disability Discrimination Act Alun Elder-Brown was prevented from taking his dog into the establishment on religious grounds and then threatened with the police when he objected.

“I was made to feel like a piece of dirt. They told me I couldn’t come in because it was against their religious beliefs to have a dog in the restaurant.

The owner is trying to make this go away by claiming it was a mistake and the dog was not barred on relgious grounds but rather hygiene – however;

He showed a card issued by the Institute of Environmental Health Officers certifying he and his dog were allowed into any premises but an argument ensued and the owners threatened to call the police if he did not leave.

Eveidently we have a culteral incompatability. This is the West, we like dogs. They have lived with us since we first started working together is a food/security exchange deal a VERY long time ago. They crossed the seas with us, fought alongside us in many battle and still do so today. From the great butrish war dogs with studded collars to the happy go lucky dogs who can sniff out explosives from meters away. Dogs are a part of our police forces and aid in saving lives and tracked down bad people every day. We have a special relationship with these semi-tame wolves. If you can’t live in a society that can get on with other species then planes leave daily.

And as for the dining experience, why not try fish and chips. Its your culture, use it or lose it.

Post navigation

4 Responses to Bring me… the PHONE!

Fish and chips are no more native to the UK than is curry. F&C was introduced by immigrants, just like curry; the only difference is that it happened a few years earlier. Specifically, F&C was introduced to the UK in the late 19th century by Jewish immigrants in the East End.

I also don’t see how you justify forcing someone to allow a dog into his shop. The owners were perfectly willing to serve the blind man – they weren’t discriminating against him – they just didn’t want the dog on their property, and why should they be forced to have it there? Do you want people forcing themselves into your home, with companions you might find objectionable? It doesn’t really matter why they don’t like dogs; it could be religious, it could be cultural, or it could just be personal. Maybe they’re afraid of dogs, or allergic — do you really think their aversion or allergy should be trumped by a customer’s blindness? If so, why?

The entire population of England was introduced by immigrants… at the point of a spear. Whats your point? A cultural icon doesn’t count if it doesn’t suit your personal measurement of introduction?

Because its the LAW. It wasn’t their home it was a place of business and they are required by law to allow a blind person to have his eyes with him. They were not afrad, they were not alergic, they clearly stated their reasons were religious.

Got anything else or are you going to keep plucking excuses out of your ass for them?

There’s a special name for countries where a relgion is given precedence over or instead of the law. Theocracy. I assume this is what you would prefer to see then.

My point is that curry now occupies the place in UK culture that fish & chips did 100 years ago. F&C had its day, and is now displaced. Indian food is now British, in exactly the same way, and for the same reason, that F&C was.

There’s a name for people who think “because it’s the LAW” is an answer: authoritarians. If you have such respect for the law, then can I assume you’ll be OK with however this is resolved? Because whatever happens will be THE LAW. If THE LAW decides one day that Sharia rules, you’re OK with that, right? And you can stop bitching about every government action or regulatory or court decision that you don’t like, because after all they are by definition THE LAW.

Meanwhile, for those of us who don’t think every act of the legislators, bureaucrats, or judges, is automatically correct, for those of us who actually care about liberty and inalienable rights, each person has the right to make the rules on his own property. If I don’t want the colour purple on my property, I can exclude anyone wearing purple, or ask them to remove the offending garments before entering. If they’re not happy they can go elsewhere. And since I don’t need anyone’s permission to run a business on my own property, I don’t have to accept conditions such as accepting all comers no matter what.

Further, if I’m allowed to exclude seeing-eye dogs because I’m allergic to them, or because I’m afraid of them, then I have an equal right to exclude them because I believe they’re unclean, or are the Devil, or whatever else my religion says. Because Islam is, in the eyes of THE LAW, just as good a religion as any other, and its believers are entitled to the free exercise of that religion, even if they happen to be doing business at the time.

Or do you think that Christian photographers should be forced to take pictures of gay weddings, and that Xian landlords should be forced to rent rooms to unmarried couples?